Scheduling: warning unpopular

[gravedigger]

I?ve thought this since 1998 and have seen no reason to think otherwise.

All teams should play conference games, ONE non power 5, and the other three should be power 5.

When fans pay as much as they do, and the ?playoff? means what it does, a MANDATED reduction in non power 5 matchups will validate the playoff. Yea, the undefeated seasons will subside. Yea, we will have to debate strength of schedule even more. But in the end, the game will improve.

All that to say I respect the effort UMass is giving today and I am not saying we shouldn?t play THEM. I?m saying we shouldn?t play 3 of them a year.

With the money power 5 conferences bring in, there should be a scheduled rotation.

Alright. Butcher me.

[Gutter Cobreh]

Don't disagree, but it helps college football overall. These small schools fund their entire athletic departments with games like this.

I don't mind playing them. I do mind not being able to blow them out like we should.

[Maroonthirteen]

I agree. Charleston Southern, Swac games, Bama plays Mercer in a few weeks....all those games are nothing more than exhibitions.

Play 9 conference games, 2 P5s and one non P5. Makes every week a playoff game.

[ckDOG]

I agree. Charleston Southern, Swac games, Bama plays Mercer in a few weeks....all those games are nothing more than exhibitions.

Play 9 conference games, 2 P5s and one non P5. Makes every week a playoff game.

This plus no more divisions. Freshen things up a bit in the SEC.

[WeWonItAll(Most)]

I agree from an entertainment perspective, probably disagree in terms of what's best for MSU. The season is only 12 games, having 3-4 gimmes on your schedule is a 1/4 to 1/3 of your season wasted.

[RocketDawg]

Don't disagree, but it helps college football overall. These small schools fund their entire athletic departments with games like this.

I don't mind playing them. I do mind not being able to blow them out like we should.

I know what you mean, but UMass isn't a small school. They're just small in football. They actually concentrate on academics. Can you imagine a college actually doing that?? **

[RocketDawg]

I?ve thought this since 1998 and have seen no reason to think otherwise.

All teams should play conference games, ONE non power 5, and the other three should be power 5.

When fans pay as much as they do, and the ?playoff? means what it does, a MANDATED reduction in non power 5 matchups will validate the playoff. Yea, the undefeated seasons will subside. Yea, we will have to debate strength of schedule even more. But in the end, the game will improve.

All that to say I respect the effort UMass is giving today and I am not saying we shouldn?t play THEM. I?m saying we shouldn?t play 3 of them a year.

With the money power 5 conferences bring in, there should be a scheduled rotation.

Alright. Butcher me.

I agree and have always thought that. I'm not worried about the athletic budgets of other schools.

[I seen it dawg]

Hate to shake things up but everyone should be playing these schools. Mandate it. Without it there are a lot of schools that wouldn’t have football teams. Teams that allow a lot of people that otherwise wouldn’t be able to go to college and hopefully make something of themselves have an avenue to do so. If you care about the sport and care about what kids are going to be doing while turning into adults then the power 5 schools should absolutely be playing these non 5 schools and giving kids a chance to better themselves. It’s more than the playoff.

[gravedigger]

I agree from an entertainment perspective, probably disagree in terms of what's best for MSU. The season is only 12 games, having 3-4 gimmes on your schedule is a 1/4 to 1/3 of your season wasted.

Strangely enough, I think it helps an MSU. The BAMAs Never lose these games. We do. These extra 3 games only serve to question whether a team would win if they played a better opponent. For us, beating 2/3 of them vs what bama did to their 3 can serve to give us a more legitimate shot at our comparison. Georgia benefitted just last week from the number one ranking. Didn?t mean bama isn?t great. Just meant they hadn?t proven what Georgia has and that was legit.

Computer algorithms are better at ciphering these nuances than people with coastal or conference loyalties.

We all know in football, unlike basketball and baseball, we can?t have a national round robin. But we can make the Hill steeper to climb for the champion. The lower hill gives the bamas an advantage in my opinion.

[IMissJack]

I?ve thought this since 1998 and have seen no reason to think otherwise.

All teams should play conference games, ONE non power 5, and the other three should be power 5.

When fans pay as much as they do, and the ?playoff? means what it does, a MANDATED reduction in non power 5 matchups will validate the playoff. Yea, the undefeated seasons will subside. Yea, we will have to debate strength of schedule even more. But in the end, the game will improve.

All that to say I respect the effort UMass is giving today and I am not saying we shouldn?t play THEM. I?m saying we shouldn?t play 3 of them a year.

With the money power 5 conferences bring in, there should be a scheduled rotation.

Alright. Butcher me.

These games also serve another purpose-to let some people heal up.

[DogsofAnarchy]

I?ve thought this since 1998 and have seen no reason to think otherwise.

All teams should play conference games, ONE non power 5, and the other three should be power 5.

When fans pay as much as they do, and the ?playoff? means what it does, a MANDATED reduction in non power 5 matchups will validate the playoff. Yea, the undefeated seasons will subside. Yea, we will have to debate strength of schedule even more. But in the end, the game will improve.

All that to say I respect the effort UMass is giving today and I am not saying we shouldn?t play THEM. I?m saying we shouldn?t play 3 of them a year.

With the money power 5 conferences bring in, there should be a scheduled rotation.

Alright. Butcher me.

98% of teams are just playing for a BOWL game. What you would be doing is:

1. Making it harder for us to go to a Bowl Game.

2. Making the bowl games we would get be lower tier all the time.

No thanks. Bad idea and let’s move along.

[dickiedawg]

It would make going to a bowl game actually meaningful, though.

[Maroonthirteen]

The NCAA had revenue of approximately 900 million last year. There is plenty of money to subsidize the non P5 schools.